The quality of the physical collector's edition is surprisingly, and unfortunately, disappointing

For all Torment discussion that does not fit elsewhere. No spoilers allowed.

Moderator: Memovira Goons

cryocore
Acolyte
Posts: 78
Joined: August 7th, 2012, 9:07 pm

Re: The quality of the physical collector's edition is surprisingly, and unfortunately, disappointing

Post by cryocore » April 5th, 2017, 4:27 am

And yet the there is a lot of us complaining about our poor treatment. So maybe you should just stay out of threads that don't concern you if you have no issue. Ok? Thanks.

Jernaugh
Scholar
Posts: 128
Joined: September 22nd, 2014, 5:41 am

Re: The quality of the physical collector's edition is surprisingly, and unfortunately, disappointing

Post by Jernaugh » April 5th, 2017, 9:24 am

His point still stands. Nobody here is qualified to speak for anybody besides themselves.

Akagi
Initiate
Posts: 4
Joined: April 5th, 2017, 10:25 am

Re: The quality of the physical collector's edition is surprisingly, and unfortunately, disappointing

Post by Akagi » April 5th, 2017, 10:31 am

TTON was my first ever kickstarter back in 2013.

Since then, i backed a ton of RPG/gaming related stuff and achived the superbacker status.

This is, by far, the worst kickstarter ever when it comes to rewards. A huge "fuck you" to the backers, borderline scam. I will never touch anything inXile related ever again, and will make sure to post warning in every kickstarter they will hold in the future.

Btw, about a year ago or so i had a feeling this kind of a dissapointment is going to happened, and emailed them asking about a full refund. Since i didnt receive anything at that moment (and never claimed any digital rewards), i thought the request was reasonable. But nope, it got denied.

Fuck you, inXile.

TronaldDump
Initiate
Posts: 1
Joined: April 5th, 2017, 11:04 am

Re: The quality of the physical collector's edition is surprisingly, and unfortunately, disappointing

Post by TronaldDump » April 5th, 2017, 11:06 am

Akagi wrote:
April 5th, 2017, 10:31 am
TTON was my first ever kickstarter back in 2013.

Since then, i backed a ton of RPG/gaming related stuff and achived the superbacker status.

This is, by far, the worst kickstarter ever when it comes to rewards. A huge "fuck you" to the backers, borderline scam. I will never touch anything inXile related ever again, and will make sure to post warning in every kickstarter they will hold in the future.

Btw, about a year ago or so i had a feeling this kind of a dissapointment is going to happened, and emailed them asking about a full refund. Since i didnt receive anything at that moment (and never claimed any digital rewards), i thought the request was reasonable. But nope, it got denied.

Fuck you, inXile.
+1

kilobug
Adventurer
Posts: 913
Joined: September 21st, 2014, 1:07 am
Location: Paris, France

Re: The quality of the physical collector's edition is surprisingly, and unfortunately, disappointing

Post by kilobug » April 5th, 2017, 12:39 pm

Akagi wrote:
April 5th, 2017, 10:31 am
TTON was my first ever kickstarter back in 2013.

Since then, i backed a ton of RPG/gaming related stuff and achived the superbacker status.
Almost the same until then, not "superbacker" for me, but still around 50 backed projects.
Akagi wrote:
April 5th, 2017, 10:31 am
This is, by far, the worst kickstarter ever when it comes to rewards.
And there we completely diverge - TTON is the Kickstarter I'm the most proud of having backed, the one that is the most to the level of its creative vision, that managed the near impossible feat of recapturing PsT brilliance and awesomeness. Sure some content were cut, there were delays, and inXile screwed many little details - but they did the most important of all things, a game that recaptures PsT vision, very well, despite the enormous challenge it was, and for that I'm ever thankful to them.

User avatar
Woolfe
Supreme Jerk
Posts: 5720
Joined: March 22nd, 2012, 6:42 pm

Re: The quality of the physical collector's edition is surprisingly, and unfortunately, disappointing

Post by Woolfe » April 5th, 2017, 3:39 pm

cryocore wrote:
April 5th, 2017, 4:27 am
And yet the there is a lot of us complaining about our poor treatment. So maybe you should just stay out of threads that don't concern you if you have no issue. Ok? Thanks.
You do not speak for everyone. and you do not get to tell me where I can and can't post.

If others agree, then they will chime in. Which will hold immeasurably more weight than your attempts to suggest your opinion is larger than yourself.

You are welcome.
It's not too late. Make it Eight!

Twigleaf
Initiate
Posts: 7
Joined: December 14th, 2013, 7:49 pm

Re: The quality of the physical collector's edition is surprisingly, and unfortunately, disappointing

Post by Twigleaf » April 5th, 2017, 3:45 pm

I still have yet to even get a shipping confirmation. Support doesn't seem to want to take the time to look and see if it has been shipped. According to inxile on Twitter, it should have already been shipped.

People in Europe are getting copies, and I backed early. Not even a signed copy either. A bit upset on another level
Chiisai Banni Banni no Kawaii Bouken Monogatari !

cryocore
Acolyte
Posts: 78
Joined: August 7th, 2012, 9:07 pm

Re: The quality of the physical collector's edition is surprisingly, and unfortunately, disappointing

Post by cryocore » April 5th, 2017, 4:43 pm

Woolfe wrote:
April 5th, 2017, 3:39 pm
cryocore wrote:
April 5th, 2017, 4:27 am
And yet the there is a lot of us complaining about our poor treatment. So maybe you should just stay out of threads that don't concern you if you have no issue. Ok? Thanks.
You do not speak for everyone. and you do not get to tell me where I can and can't post.

If others agree, then they will chime in. Which will hold immeasurably more weight than your attempts to suggest your opinion is larger than yourself.

You are welcome.
Well maybe if you actually took the time to use your brain, you would understand that the "we" are those of us who are frustrated.
I hope you understand that not everything includes you, so from now on when I use we, and I will know that I don't mean you. In fact this is last time i will even acknowledge you.

User avatar
Woolfe
Supreme Jerk
Posts: 5720
Joined: March 22nd, 2012, 6:42 pm

Re: The quality of the physical collector's edition is surprisingly, and unfortunately, disappointing

Post by Woolfe » April 5th, 2017, 5:15 pm

cryocore wrote:
April 5th, 2017, 4:43 pm
Woolfe wrote:
April 5th, 2017, 3:39 pm
cryocore wrote:
April 5th, 2017, 4:27 am
And yet the there is a lot of us complaining about our poor treatment. So maybe you should just stay out of threads that don't concern you if you have no issue. Ok? Thanks.
You do not speak for everyone. and you do not get to tell me where I can and can't post.

If others agree, then they will chime in. Which will hold immeasurably more weight than your attempts to suggest your opinion is larger than yourself.

You are welcome.
Well maybe if you actually took the time to use your brain, you would understand that the "we" are those of us who are frustrated.
I hope you understand that not everything includes you, so from now on when I use we, and I will know that I don't mean you. In fact this is last time i will even acknowledge you.
See that sort of commentary is exactly why people like myself call you out on things. Calm yourself down.
I know exactly what you mean. You can see it throughout your posting history.

<shrug> no water off my back.
It's not too late. Make it Eight!

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9117
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: The quality of the physical collector's edition is surprisingly, and unfortunately, disappointing

Post by Drool » April 5th, 2017, 10:57 pm

Alwa nasci korliri das.

I neither work, nor speak, for inXile.

Not too late; make it eight!

User avatar
vv221
Forum Moderator
Posts: 592
Joined: April 10th, 2013, 6:43 am
Location: France
Contact:

Re: The quality of the physical collector's edition is surprisingly, and unfortunately, disappointing

Post by vv221 » April 6th, 2017, 1:11 am

Thanks for the reminder Drool, let’s hope I won’t have to take an active role in enforcing these rules.

AstralWanderer
Initiate
Posts: 11
Joined: April 7th, 2012, 2:52 am

Re: The quality of the physical collector's edition is surprisingly, and unfortunately, disappointing

Post by AstralWanderer » April 6th, 2017, 1:56 am

Given the furore that the "Steam-installer" DVD caused with Wasteland 2, I'm gobsmacked that InXile have repeated this mistake with Torment (not that the replacement DVD was much better - packed using a 64-bit program making it unusable on 32-bit Windows and relying on a DOS batch file for Linux/Mac installation).

My delivery is currently at a UPS collection point and will be sent back to Techland shortly - given that I'm running 32-bit Windows there's little point in collecting it and InXile have so far failed to respond to a Kickstarter PM, Zendesk ticket or forum post.

Given that non-Steam backers like myself were also effectively excluded from alpha- and beta-copies, I would have to agree with others here about InXile's almost contemptuous treatment of backers. For all of Brian Fargo's play-acting about being treated like dirt by mainstream publishers, he seems more than happy to dish out similar treatment to those who entrusted him with advance payments.

GothamHunter
Initiate
Posts: 14
Joined: January 8th, 2017, 3:40 pm

Re: The quality of the physical collector's edition is surprisingly, and unfortunately, disappointing

Post by GothamHunter » April 6th, 2017, 6:48 am

AstralWanderer wrote:
April 6th, 2017, 1:56 am
Given the furore that the "Steam-installer" DVD caused with Wasteland 2, I'm gobsmacked that InXile have repeated this mistake with Torment (not that the replacement DVD was much better - packed using a 64-bit program making it unusable on 32-bit Windows and relying on a DOS batch file for Linux/Mac installation).

My delivery is currently at a UPS collection point and will be sent back to Techland shortly - given that I'm running 32-bit Windows there's little point in collecting it and InXile have so far failed to respond to a Kickstarter PM, Zendesk ticket or forum post.

Given that non-Steam backers like myself were also effectively excluded from alpha- and beta-copies, I would have to agree with others here about InXile's almost contemptuous treatment of backers. For all of Brian Fargo's play-acting about being treated like dirt by mainstream publishers, he seems more than happy to dish out similar treatment to those who entrusted him with advance payments.
I'm going to just be honest here and say that I'm pretty surprised you're using a 32 bit OS to begin with, especially Windows XP, let alone it being the one used to play video games on. I'd say it's pretty understandable if it was developed for modern 64-bit OS's only; attempting to cater to the lowest common denominator makes for a low quality product.

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3334
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: The quality of the physical collector's edition is surprisingly, and unfortunately, disappointing

Post by Gizmo » April 6th, 2017, 8:48 am

GothamHunter wrote:
April 6th, 2017, 6:48 am
I'm going to just be honest here and say that I'm pretty surprised you're using a 32 bit OS to begin with, especially Windows XP, let alone it being the one used to play video games on. I'd say it's pretty understandable if it was developed for modern 64-bit OS's only; attempting to cater to the lowest common denominator makes for a low quality product.
I'd be using Windows 2K right now if I had the choice. As it is I had to side-grade to XP [bloat] because Bethesda compiled FO3 to require an X-box dll in XP**... When Oblivion worked just fine in 2k. I had to move to Win7 [even more bloat] because Blender stopped supporting XP. :evil:

If I could dump [post 2k] Windows I would, but I have too much of a software investment in it. All I'd ever want in an OS, is a shell/window manager; I don't need a video game for an OS.

WinXP 64 bit was tolerable; if a bit of a pariah. I'd have stayed on that if not for the Blender dev team dropping support for it.

**Actually... it might have been Microsoft making their compiler's default project settings seem to require XP.

AstralWanderer
Initiate
Posts: 11
Joined: April 7th, 2012, 2:52 am

Re: The quality of the physical collector's edition is surprisingly, and unfortunately, disappointing

Post by AstralWanderer » April 6th, 2017, 9:16 am

GothamHunter wrote:
April 6th, 2017, 6:48 am
I'm going to just be honest here and say that I'm pretty surprised you're using a 32 bit OS to begin with, especially Windows XP, let alone it being the one used to play video games on...
I have a 10-year investment in software and hardware which 64-bit Windows won't fully support (including a Microsoft Sidewinder Strategic Commander before anyone comments about "fly-by-night" companies not supporting their products) and which includes security software that likely won't ever run on Win64 due to Patchguard which hinders kernel and SSDT modification.

I also thoroughly detest the user-interface changes made since WinXP (TIKFAM, The Ribbon) and the architectural ugliness of Win64 (requiring separate Program Files folders for 32- and 64-bit code and whoever at Microsoft thought it a good idea to place 64-bit code in Windows\System32 and 32-bit code in Windows\SysWOW64?). The now-effectively compulsory spyware in Windows 10 (telemetry enabled by default, can be disabled but other users have reported compulsory Windows updates silently re-enabling it) makes it a total no-go. Indeed, I'd be with Gizmo and Win2K (MS' last great achievement in my view) if I could have persuaded it to recognise PCI-E cards.

Pillars of Eternity, Dreamfall Chapters, Grim Dawn, Divinity: Original Sin and, of course, Wasteland 2 (the non-"enhanced" version) all run on WinXP and do so with less memory usage than later versions of Windows. I doubt anyone could call these KS projects "low quality". Torment itself worked on XP when in alpha. All bar one of these projects use the Unity3D toolkit which should make the underlying OS insignificant from a development perspective.

However one key point is InXile sought (and received) funding for this KS over a year before WinXP's official end-of-support from MS. It may now be 3 years since that date but why should backers be excluded due to InXile's long development timescale?
Last edited by AstralWanderer on April 6th, 2017, 2:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3334
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: The quality of the physical collector's edition is surprisingly, and unfortunately, disappointing

Post by Gizmo » April 6th, 2017, 9:26 am

sear wrote:
April 3rd, 2017, 10:31 am
... it appears Techland instead took the full backer manual, formatted it to fit into 40 pages (though they didn't remove contents from what we can see), and then called it the Traveler's Guide. Rather than having two separate versions, they instead used the same one for all boxes, which was not what we agreed on.

We are assuming there was some kind of misunderstanding on Techland's end, but regardless, we are not happy to hear that the contents seem to have been changed without our input, and will be following up with Techland about this.
Does this mean [tentatively] that there might be corrective action taken in the near future; a second mail-out?
AstralWanderer wrote:
April 6th, 2017, 9:16 am
I also thorough detest the user-interface changes made since WinXP (TIKFAM, The Ribbon) and the architectural ugliness of Win64 (requiring separate Program Files folders for 32- and 64-bit code and whoever at Microsoft thought it a good idea to place 64-bit code in Windows\System32 and 32-bit code in Windows\SysWOW64?). The now-effectively compulsory spyware in Windows 10 (telemetry enabled by default, can be disabled but other users have reported compulsory Windows updates silently re-enabling it) makes it a total no-go.
If you ever find yourself forced to update the OS to Vista or Win7... ClassicShell tames the Window UI silliness quite well.
(It does so on Win8 & Win10 also.)

*But you will probably hate that the Win7 team discarded the network activity icon; and hamstrung the Explorer shell by surgically removing its dock-able toolbar functionality. Image
Last edited by Gizmo on April 6th, 2017, 9:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

AstralWanderer
Initiate
Posts: 11
Joined: April 7th, 2012, 2:52 am

Re: The quality of the physical collector's edition is surprisingly, and unfortunately, disappointing

Post by AstralWanderer » April 6th, 2017, 9:39 am

Gizmo wrote:
April 6th, 2017, 8:48 am
...When Oblivion worked just fine in 2k. I had to move to Win7 [even more bloat] because Blender stopped supporting XP. :evil: ...**Actually... it might have been Microsoft making their compiler's default project settings seem to require XP.
If so (you receive a "not a valid Win32 application" message when trying to run Blender) then that can be "fixed" by adjusting the program file header - see here for an example.

GothamHunter
Initiate
Posts: 14
Joined: January 8th, 2017, 3:40 pm

Re: The quality of the physical collector's edition is surprisingly, and unfortunately, disappointing

Post by GothamHunter » April 6th, 2017, 11:06 am

AstralWanderer wrote:
April 6th, 2017, 9:16 am
GothamHunter wrote:
April 6th, 2017, 6:48 am
I'm going to just be honest here and say that I'm pretty surprised you're using a 32 bit OS to begin with, especially Windows XP, let alone it being the one used to play video games on...
I have a 10-year investment in software and hardware which 64-bit Windows won't fully support (including a Microsoft Sidewinder Strategic Commander before anyone comments about "fly-by-night" companies not supporting their products) and which includes security software that likely won't ever run on Win64 due to Patchguard which hinders kernel and SSDT modification.

I also thorough detest the user-interface changes made since WinXP (TIKFAM, The Ribbon) and the architectural ugliness of Win64 (requiring separate Program Files folders for 32- and 64-bit code and whoever at Microsoft thought it a good idea to place 64-bit code in Windows\System32 and 32-bit code in Windows\SysWOW64?). The now-effectively compulsory spyware in Windows 10 (telemetry enabled by default, can be disabled but other users have reported compulsory Windows updates silently re-enabling it) makes it a total no-go. Indeed, I'd be with Gizmo and Win2K (MS' last great achievement in my view) if I could have persuaded it to recognise PCI-E cards.

Pillars of Eternity, Dreamfall Chapters, Grim Dawn, Divinity: Original Sin and, of course, Wasteland 2 (the non-"enhanced" version) all run on WinXP and do so with less memory usage than later versions of Windows. I doubt anyone could call these KS projects "low quality". Torment itself worked on XP when in alpha. All bar one of these projects use the Unity3D toolkit which should make the underlying OS insignificant from a development perspective.

However one key point is InXile sought (and received) funding for this KS over a year before WinXP's official end-of-support from MS. It may now be 3 years since that date but why should backers be excluded due to InXile's long development timescale?
Legacy software is definitely a reason to hold onto it. My point was more-so regarding having an operating system installation that's used primary for things such as playing video games. Eventually pre Windows 7 support, and 32bit support, will be gone. It might be worth investing a dual OS setup for those particular needs.

Good point regarding the other KS that came out great; foot in mouth there.

kaiman
Scholar
Posts: 229
Joined: March 10th, 2015, 3:40 am

Re: The quality of the physical collector's edition is surprisingly, and unfortunately, disappointing

Post by kaiman » April 6th, 2017, 12:03 pm

Gizmo wrote:
April 6th, 2017, 9:26 am
Does this mean [tentatively] that there might be corrective action taken in the near future; a second mail-out?
Yeah, every buyer of the regular Techland edition gets sent the 30 page (unformatted) manual they should have gotten in the first place :-)
AstralWanderer wrote:
April 6th, 2017, 9:16 am
I have a 10-year investment in software and hardware which 64-bit Windows won't fully support (including a Microsoft Sidewinder Strategic Commander before anyone comments about "fly-by-night" companies not supporting their products) and which includes security software that likely won't ever run on Win64 due to Patchguard which hinders kernel and SSDT modification.
I'd say it's about time to go and look for an alternative to Windows. I had been reluctant to leave Win2k myself, then hung on to XP until it reached EOL. I had a Win8.1 partition for my gaming fix for a year afterwards, but since autumn of '15 I am "clean". If you absolutely must, keep your old PC around for your legacy hard- and software (or dual boot or run XP inside a VM). Vendors (both hardware and software) simply do not support XP any more and even the days of Win7 are numbered. Jumping ship might put you in cold water for a while, but you'll adapt and never look back!

User avatar
morte_rictusgrin
Initiate
Posts: 23
Joined: August 28th, 2015, 1:26 pm

Re: The quality of the physical collector's edition is surprisingly, and unfortunately, disappointing

Post by morte_rictusgrin » April 7th, 2017, 6:43 am

Salmanasar wrote:
March 31st, 2017, 12:05 am
Atsuico wrote:
March 30th, 2017, 9:21 pm
Well just like I said, 20 years down the road GOG and Steam may disappear.
well, "20 years down the road" your CD's probably wont work anyway. Their life expectancy is arround 15 years, sometimes more, sometimes less.
I've got PS:T boxed copy with all CDs still running. it's 18 years now, FYI.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests